Hot Topics:

Sox' emphasis on defense a head-scratcher

By Chaz Scoggins, chaz@lowellsun.com

Updated:
01/10/2010 06:36:21 AM EST

Somehow I don't think the Red Sox would be all that worried about their defense if they were capable of scoring runs more consistently. I think they're looking for scapegoats in the wrong places, and in 2010 their emphasis on defense will mean instead of losing 4-2 games they'll lose them 3-2.

I still don't understand why the Red Sox think their problems in 2009 were primarily defensive.

I find it hard to believe that the team that won the World Series in 2007 while setting major-league records for fewest errors and highest fielding percentage and leading the AL in fielding for the first time in 50 years could get so bad defensively in just two years.

The Red Sox finished third in the AL in fielding in 2009, committing just 82 errors.

Do the Red Sox really think Manny Ramirez was a better defensive left fielder than Jason Bay? Or that Coco Crisp was a better defensive center fielder than Jacoby Ellsbury? They must, because five of the other eight regular defenders were the same ones playing in 2007.

Sure, shortstop has been a revolving door since winning the 2004 World Series, although they won in 2007 with Julio Lugo there. And unquestionably Mike Lowell's range at third base was severely limited in 2009 by his hip injury, a problem that needed to be addressed since the club obviously believes his range will not improve significantly.

But I can't comprehend the Red Sox' dissatisfaction with the two outfielders.

Advertisement

I never saw either Bay or Ellsbury fail to catch up to a ball I thought should have been caught, and outside of his throwing arm Ellsbury was flat-out spectacular. (Crisp's arm was far worse.)

Yeah, I know that fielding statistics can be be virtually meaningless because they can't measure range. But I don't put any credence in these convoluted range factor formulae either. Your eyes can tell you a lot, and my eyes tell me balls weren't dropping just beyond reach of Bay or Ellsbury. They both got good jumps, ran proper routes, and if the balls were catchable they caught them.

But here's an even bigger reason why I can't fathom the Red Sox' sudden yearning for an air-tight defense: They have one of the best power-pitching staffs in baseball and don't let opponents put all that many balls in play.

Dating back to 2003, Red Sox pitchers have never finished lower than fourth in the AL in strikeouts. They led the league in 2003 and 2008, finished second in 2004 and 2009, third in 2005 and 2007, and fourth in 2006 (when they missed the playoffs for the only time in that stretch). Except for 2006 and 2008, their pitchers have also finished in the upper half of the league in fewest walks.

More than 26 percent of the outs recorded by Red Sox pitchers over the last seven seasons have come on strikeouts, and the more strikeouts they get the less pressure there is on their defense.

These aren't your Red Sox sinker-slider staffs of the 1970s when Bill Lee said his definition of a perfect game was nine singles followed by nine double-play balls. Most of their pitchers rear back and blow hitters away.

Throwing strikes and preventing opponents from putting the ball in play is a huge advantage that most of their rivals don't share. So why are the Red Sox all of a sudden fanatical about their defense?

Beats me ... and without a single player in their lineup who is a lock to hit 30 homers or drive in 100 runs in 2010 -- much less two or three of them -- I think the Red Sox are going to get beaten more often than they expect.

Unfortunately for Red Sox fans they only got to see Andre Dawson for two seasons at the end of his career when his knees were completely shot and he was only the shell of the ballplayer he used to be.

I was pleased to see him finally get elected to the Hall of Fame on his ninth try. If he had avoided all those injuries, his election almost certainly would have been a no-brainer.

Dawson had a fierce visage that could intimidate you if you didn't know him. His features belied his personality, however, and he ranks right up there with the classiest, most humble, and gentlest players in the history of the game.

Back in 1986-1987, when baseball's owners were illegally colluding to hold down the salaries and restrict the movement of free agents, Dawson, a three-time All-Star and 1977 NL Rookie of the Year who was desperate to get off the artificial turf in Montreal that had ruined his knees, had trouble finding any team willing to sign him. That spring he went to Dallas Green, the GM of the Cubs, and told him that he would sign a blank contract and Green could fill in the amount he thought was fair.

Green wrote in the figure $500,000, making Dawson the second-lowest paid regular on the Cubs. Dawson didn't scream or pout. All he did that year was bat .287 with 49 homers and 137 RBI and become the first player on a last-place team to win the MVP Award.

The Boston Baseball Writers have always allowed the guests at their annual dinner to fly on a first-class ticket. The year that Dawson came as a guest, he flew to Boston from Miami in coach because he knew it was less expensive.

Welcome to your discussion forum: Sign in with a Disqus account or your social networking account for your comment to be posted immediately, provided it meets the guidelines. (READ HOW.)
Comments made here are the sole responsibility of the person posting them; these comments do not reflect the opinion of The Sun. So keep it civil.